I'll preface this all by saying that I've never been to Bandon, would love to go, and Whitten's "review" did not change my outsider's opinion at all.
My initial reaction to reading the piece was an incredulous one, since he just seemed to be taking petty pot-shots at the place for no reason other than to just do it. But I thought about it for a moment and concluded that Whitten was engaging in satire in two opposite directions (I don't know if this was the intention, but it was the effect).
First, he was turning the spotlight on the near-religious attitude many golfers hold toward Bandon. Not that it's wrong to have a strong affinity toward the place, but it is a posture that Whitten, evidently, considered ripe for a little fun-poking.
Second, though, Whitten also seems satirizing the practice of overly critical reviews of places that are widely held to be very good and great. Surely this is not the first time a critic has appeared to pan a resort or restaurant or a product that the vast, vast majority of people love.
It is also important to note that in his introduction to the article, Whitten basically says to the reader, "This has my name on it, but it isn't REALLY me. I'm applying an eye to Bandon Dunes that is as critical as Steve Jobs' was known to be." Judging by the reaction that Whitten has gotten among people who respect and love Bandon Dunes, it seems pretty clear that the same type of scrutiny Jobs used during the design process of products made by his company need not be used when appraising a place like Bandon Dunes that, as long as the golf is as good as everyone knows it to be, will always have full rooms.